O R D E R

% 06.02.2024

1. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 18.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Distruct Judge-01, South West District, Dwarka District Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as „ADJ‟) in Contempt Petition No. 1/2024 titled as “Karamveer Solanki vs. DDA & Ors.” The petitioner no.

1/DDA herein is the defendant before the learned Trial Court.

2. It is submitted that the application under Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ((hereinafter referred as „CPC‟) shall not be pressed before the learned Trial Court as an application was moved yesterday in the post lunch session before the learned Trial Court to withdraw the said application to recall the ex-parte order dated 18.01.2024, however, today the learned Presiding Officer is on leave, therefore the application could not be withdrawn.

3. Issue notice.

4. Mr. S.C. Singhal, learned counsel for the respondent appears on advance notice and accepts notice of the petition. It is stated that the copy of the petition has not been furnished. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner undertakes to email the copy of the petition immediately.

5. Learned senior counsel submits that the respondent herein filed a suit for declaration and permanent/prohibitory injunction against the petitioner no. 1/DDA before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, District South West, Dwarka Courts along with an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC which when came to be heard was dismissed by the learned Senior Civil Judge vide order dated 16.12.2023. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent herein preferred an appeal before the Court of learned ADJ, Dwarka Court.

6. It is submitted that without issuing any notice on the appeal to the respondent, an ex-parte order had been passed and the appeal was also disposed of on the same day vide order dated 02.01.2024.

7. The learned Court of ADJ passed the restraint orders against the petitioner herein without having been afforded an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as no notice was issued to the petitioner herein.

8. It is further submitted that subsequent thereto, the respondent herein preferred a Contempt Petition under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC bearing No. 1/2024 before the learned Trial Court which came to be heard on

18.01.2024 and the learned ADJ observed as follows :

“The present application should have been deemed to be filed under Section 36 of CPC r/w Order XXI Rule 32 (2) of CPC.

Exercising my powers under Section 32 and Section 94 of the CPC, DCP South East District is hereby directed to take the Sh. Vikas Singh, Commissioner (Land & Management), DDA exercising power of land and management of DDA into custody and produce him before this Court on or before 09.02.2024 in order to serve upon him the Show Cause Notice, as why he shall not undergo Civil lmprisonment of 3 months.

If DCP, South East fails to arrest the Sh. Vikas Singh, Commissioner (Land & Management), DDA, then he is directed to appear in the Court in person to explain as to why he failed to arrest the aforesaid Commissioner (Land & Management)/ Director of DDA.

Case adjourned to 09.02.2024.”

9. The learned senior counsel submits that the impugned order is against the canons of law as a senior officer of the DDA has been directed to be taken into custody and then serve upon him a show cause notice. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1/DDA apprehends that the arrest warrants have been already issued by the DCP concerned, therefore, in the said ermergent circumstances, the operation of the impugned order be stayed.

10. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has received the e-copy of the petition and a brief reply is to be filed.

11. Reply be filed within three weeks with an advance copy to the other side. Rejoinder, if any , be filed within a week thereafter with an advance copy to the other side

12. Apart from hearing the arguments, the impugned order and the reco